Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
Driverless Cars in 2016
- Thread starter Shonuff
- Start date
-
Guest, did you like the last podcast notification?? Well here's the second one, and for the third podcast! Yep. This Thursday 8-8-24 at 7pm Central
Go here to check out his podcast thread for info on topics and links!Go into the FoH discord and find the Happy Time Fun Hour channel and give it a listen!
Joeboo
Molten Core Raider
- 8,157
- 140
That's the main problem so far. Driverless cars follow the rules/laws so well that they're actually kinda dangerous with humans driving around them. Driverless car will drive the speed limit of 65 while everyone else is going 80 and passing them on both sides. Driverless cars can get stuck at 4-way stops because the other 3 directions never stop completely, people just roll through stop signs, etc.
Borzak
Bronze Baron of the Realm
- 25,364
- 33,032
I thought I read a few weeks ago that google driverless cars had a fender bender rate of twice that of human operated cars. They weren't equipped to deal with people who gave up the right away to merge and such. Not major accidents but small fender benders.
As someone mentioned just because the sign says 70mph speed limit doesn't mean that. I can imagine you would get run over and cause multiple accidents on the interstate in the morning where average traffic flow is 80+. For the longest time TX had a big campaign about how it didn't matter how fast the other car was going it was the law to move over and get out of the left lane. TX used to release the largest cause of accidents and number one for a number of years was a vehicle driving too slow. Of course that included farm machinery, other heavy equipment moving, logging equipment and such.
Study: Self-driving cars have higher accident rate
As someone mentioned just because the sign says 70mph speed limit doesn't mean that. I can imagine you would get run over and cause multiple accidents on the interstate in the morning where average traffic flow is 80+. For the longest time TX had a big campaign about how it didn't matter how fast the other car was going it was the law to move over and get out of the left lane. TX used to release the largest cause of accidents and number one for a number of years was a vehicle driving too slow. Of course that included farm machinery, other heavy equipment moving, logging equipment and such.
Study: Self-driving cars have higher accident rate
Very few humans obey the road signs. They follow the flow of traffic.
Maybe deployed in a very limited market? I don't think these things have been operated outside of sunny warm climates yet. I'd like to see how they programmed to deal with, and differentiate between, deer and people, too.
In general, I like driving and am not very interested in the function outside of part-time use for road trips.
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
I've always done a lot of driving for business. Sometimes it's three or four hours a day. If I could do paperwork while being driven, I'm all for it.
ToeMissile
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 3,138
- 2,024
Also, people like the 85 year old woman who rear ended me today could have been using her cell phone in safety.
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 26,289
- 40,630
I doubt that's true, actually. A lot of laws are wholly unready for any advances in AI/automation at the consumer level. You can get found guilty of a DUI for just for having the keys and being in a car drunk (ie capacity to drive), so I imagine any self-driving car for quite some time will have a 'manual-mode' and you're just going to be guilty no matter what if it happens.On a positive note, you can't get a DUI if the car is driving itself. Personally, I won't be an early adopter, because I'm waiting on one of these.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,225
- 97,808
God i can't wait for them. Nothing makes my jimmies rustle like cars stacked up bumper to bumper at red lights.
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 26,289
- 40,630
I just doubt they're ready for most situations that actually cause problems for normal drivers and they will cause more of those situations by being so particular. Can you imagine hundreds of those shitting up HOV lanes on freeways by traveling exactly the speed limit? What about dealing with snow or water where a driver sees rain/ice far enough in advance to slow down and take a more cautious route and the g-car goes barreling into black ice at 65. Can they even deal with train crossings without beams like the light rail in phoenix which is basically just lights? You can take a right on red in some places and hit a train.
I'm all for autopilot like Tesla is doing to solve the highway problems but the google shit is only going to cause people to have even less attention and take zero responsibility for driving and invariably it will need manual intervention at some point.
I'm all for autopilot like Tesla is doing to solve the highway problems but the google shit is only going to cause people to have even less attention and take zero responsibility for driving and invariably it will need manual intervention at some point.
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,225
- 97,808
It will require quite a rewrite of traffic laws and the way we view driving but I doubt there will be any opposition once the tech is truly ready when people realize they can sleep on their hour commutes or watch movies on road trips or get shit faced drunk without worrying about duis.
fris
Vyemm Raider
- 2,148
- 2,440
bring it all on, let consumers pick the winner. i can't wait till i can get in the car and sleep for a few hours and wake up where i want to be. airlines are going to lose a ton of short flight business. long drive to work? no prob anymore.
eventually we will need installations at every light, stop sign and every few miles to expand the network our cars run on.
eventually we will need installations at every light, stop sign and every few miles to expand the network our cars run on.
- 6,051
- 6,036
Yep. I'm all for this as well. So far, all I'm seeing here is "they won't exceed the speed limit like everyone else", which is only an issue if you believe in your God-given right to ignore the speed limit. Which is, you know, not a right, at all.
I mean, I saw in here "just because the sign says 70 doesn't mean that's the limit"? Uh, yes. It does mean that's the limit. What did you think it meant? "Go 70 if you feel like it"? Just because most humans (who are usually retards behind the wheel) choose to ignore the limit doesn't mean that it isn't still a limit, heh.
Situational awareness is the only missing link right now. As has already been pointed out, it will be very difficult for a driverless car to understand the stupidity behind a human driver 100% of the time. Things like black ice will also be a problem, yes, but I'm of the opinion that 99% of the problems with the AI will be human-driver-related.
I mean, I saw in here "just because the sign says 70 doesn't mean that's the limit"? Uh, yes. It does mean that's the limit. What did you think it meant? "Go 70 if you feel like it"? Just because most humans (who are usually retards behind the wheel) choose to ignore the limit doesn't mean that it isn't still a limit, heh.
Situational awareness is the only missing link right now. As has already been pointed out, it will be very difficult for a driverless car to understand the stupidity behind a human driver 100% of the time. Things like black ice will also be a problem, yes, but I'm of the opinion that 99% of the problems with the AI will be human-driver-related.
Cinge
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 7,271
- 2,294
Much as I trust computers driving instead of 95% of humans, I don't see them meshing well with human drivers at all. It would have to be all or nothing, imo.
Plus I see the whole thing falling apart after enough lawsuits against whoever makes the AI, when something bad happens.
Not to mention security, IE 3rd parties gaining access to the car's AI.
Plus I see the whole thing falling apart after enough lawsuits against whoever makes the AI, when something bad happens.
Not to mention security, IE 3rd parties gaining access to the car's AI.